diamond
ONE love, blood, life
how about..
thank u.
thank u-
jofo.
thank u.
thank u-
jofo.
Cow of the Seas said:so bama, what you are saying then is that only i can have smart assed remarks? because im so rich in sarcasm and smartasstics, noone else can compete?
your post about whipping asses on malls was pretty funny though.
STING2 said:Rono,
Well if Iraq in fact destroyed the weapons that are missing from the report, they should be showing us the evidence. The "dog ate my homework" excuse is not going to cut it here.
some would consider this an instant classic.U2Bama said:
Seeing DEATHBEAR call someone else a smart ass is about as ridiculous as me putting on a Batman costume and running through a crowded, busy shopping mall on Christmas Eve slapping shoppers on the ass.
~U2Alabama
STING2 said:Rono,
Well if Iraq in fact destroyed the weapons that are missing from the report, they should be showing us the evidence. The "dog ate my homework" excuse is not going to cut it here.
STING2 said:United Nations resolutions past in regards to Israel and Cyprus were passed under CHAPTER 6 RULES! Chapter 6 Rules do not allow the use of force to bring violators into compliance with the resolutions. The 16 UN resolutions that Iraq is in violation of were passed under CHAPTER 7 RULES of the United Nations which require, if need be, the use of force to bring about compliance with United Nations resolutions.
STING2 said:I don't have time to respond fully at the moment but I just wanted to say that it is not incumbent on the UN to prove that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, it is incumbent on Iraq to prove that they do not have weapons of mass destruction and for the UN to verify whether that is an established fact. There are a vast number of weapons missing from the list that Iraq produced recently. Iraq claims that they were destroyed and then like a child claiming "the dog ate my homework" claims that they destroyed the evidence of the destruction of the weapons. There would be considerable evidence of any destruction of such a large amount of weapons, and if Iraq does not show this evidence if it is in fact so they destroyed the weapons, one has to assume that the weapons still exist.
People should remember that it was Iraq that invaded Kuwait and with the Ceacefire of the Gulf War agreed to all the terms set down by the coalition including giving up all their weapons of mass destruction and providing the proof that they have done so. Iraq has yet to prove that they have destroyed all their weapons of mass destruction, and unless they do, Iraq will have to be disarmed by military force!
FizzingWhizzbees said:
In other words, Iraq is guilty until proven innocent. How do you think Iraq could prove itself innocent - it's declared it doesn't have prohibited weapons, it's permitted UN inspectors unrestricted access to the country, what more can it do to prove its innocence? By contrast, it seems that the US does not have to give any sort of proof before making accusations that Iraq has prohibited weapons.
Dreadsox said:
Let me get this straight....
1. They possessed WMD
2. They stop inspectors years ago
3. THey let the inspectors return.
4. They provide no evidence that what they had is destroyed.
5. We should believe them??????